On Feb 26, 2012, at 8:20 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: > From: "Jacopo Cappellato" <jacopo.cappell...@hotwaxmedia.com> >> Hi Jacques, >> >> On Feb 26, 2012, at 11:34 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >> >>> So, to be consistent, we should swap our stable demo from 09.4 to 10.04 and >>> keep 09.04 as old demo like Christian began to work on it. We will see ASAP >>> I guess... >>> We will then also update the index page to let people know they can still >>> test/use the oldest demo (would be 09.04 until next swap). >> >> thanks for bringing up this topic, it was the next in my todo list. >> There are a few things to discuss about the way we have setup our demos: >> >> * we publish a link to the trunk demo from the main page: this is very >> useful for developers but I doubt it is compliant with the ASF policies; I >> propose to keep the demo but remove the link from the site pages (we will >> keep the info in the Wiki and share the url in Jira or dev list >> communications) > > Are you sure ASF has policies about what should be demoed and what should > not? But finally if we would want both it's more a resource issues, see > below...
There is no policy that prevents us from publishing a demo of unreleased code (i.e. not officially signed and approved for distribution by the PMC): it is still our responsibility to not induce *users* (but developers are fine!) to use unreleased code. What I would like to avoid is something like this: * new user: "hey demo-trunk is great, I like feature XYZ, where can I download this software?" * committer: "feature XYZ is only available from trunk, please checkout and use that" So my point is: why are we demoing the trunk to users (the ofbiz main page is mostly addressed to them) if the users will not be able to use the code until is released (and this could take up to a year)? If, as you mention, it is a useful resource for developers (and I completely agree with you) we should probably move the urls (or at least clarify the labels) to another place in order to avoid any confusion. > >> * instead of demoing releases we are actually demoing release branches; this >> is less critical than the above point but still not completely ok with the >> ASF policies; we can address this in one of the following ways: >> a) ignore the problem for now (having a running instance of each of the >> release branches is useful for developers but also for users) > > Yes, really. It's easier for both parts to exchanges about popping issues. > I'm ok to be at the service of users, but I wonder if it's worth the effort > on this aspect... > >> b) build the demos on latest official releases instead of branches; and >> possibly add new instances for the branches as well (but publish, in the >> indexpage, the url to the official releases only) > > We have not enough places for more than 3 demos. Users can build their own > demos locally. Of course unofficial demo servers could be used, but it has > been proved in the past that it's easier to have only Apache demos to > maintain... Things are pretty stable for a while (apart some unexplained > Derby issues recently), of course running real realeas unstead would not > change that much. Only that we would lose the very handy part for committers > (3 instances running is great). > >> c) hide the links to the demo instances from the main page >> * personally (but this is minor) I don't like the names: "demo-trunk", >> "demo-old"... I would prefer a cleaner approach where the names are neutral >> like "test1", "test2" etc... or "demo1", "demo2" etc... we will then decide >> what to publish on them >> * I don't like the name "stable release" because we have actually several >> stable release that are valid at the same time: currently 09.04.02 and 10.04 >> are both stable releases; soon we will also have 11.04.01 stable release > > demo-trunk and demo-stable name were 1st suggested by infra. Then we agreed > on demo-old for the penultimate Yeah, I remember... and this doesn't help me to like them more :-) To summarize: if we want to keep 3 instances to simplify the work of OFBiz developers rather than users then we should probably have: demo-trunk --> trunk demo-stable --> 11.04 branch demo-old --> 10.04 branch because these are the 3 active branches (even if we still don't have a release from 11.04, but this should come soon). But as you can see the names don't make much sense as 10.04 is not "old" and 11.04 is not more "stable" than 10.04 Kind regards, Jacopo > >> >> Summary: >> 1) demos are useful to users and developers >> 2) links to demos for users should be shown in the ofbiz site; links to >> demos for developers should be kept in the dev list/Jira/wiki > > We would need more resources and I doubt infra will agree. Same issues for > the 2 points below > > To be discussed more... ;o) > > Jacques > >> 3) demos for users should be based on official releases only: 09.04.02, 10.04 >> 4) demos for developers should be based on trunk and active release >> branches, currently: trunk, 10.04, 11.04 (and soon 12.04) >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Jacopo >>
